Economic burden of osteoarthritis - multi-country estimates of direct and indirect costs from the BISCUITS study.

Data from 'BISCUITS', a large Nordic cohort study linking several registries, were used to estimate differences in average direct and indirect costs between patients with osteoarthritis and controls (matched 1:1 based on birth year and sex) from the general population in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark for 2017. Patients ≥18 years with ≥1 diagnosis of osteoarthritis (ICD-10: M15-M19) recorded in specialty or primary care (the latter available for a subset of patients in Sweden and for all patients in Finland) during 2011-2017 were included. Patients with a cancer diagnosis (ICD-10: C00-C43/C45-C97) were excluded. Productivity loss (sick leave and disability pension) and associated indirect costs were estimated among working-age adults (18-66 years). In 2017, average annual incremental direct costs among adults with osteoarthritis (n=1,157,236) in specialty care relative to controls ranged between €1,259 and €1,693 (p<0.001) per patient across all countries. Total average annual incremental costs were €3,224-€4,969 (p<0.001) per patient. Healthcare cost differences were mainly explained by osteoarthritis patients having more surgeries. However, among patients with both primary and secondary care data, primary care costs exceeded the costs of surgery. Primary care constituted 41 and 29 % of the difference in direct costs in Sweden and Finland, respectively. From a societal perspective, the total economic burden of osteoarthritis is substantial, and the incremental cost was estimated to €1.1-€1.3 billion yearly for patients in specialty care across the Nordic countries. When including patients in primary care, incremental costs rose to €3 billion in Sweden and €1.8 billion in Finland. Given the large economic impact, finding cost-effective and safe therapeutic strategies for these patients will be important.

Medication use and comorbidities in an increasingly younger osteoarthritis population: an 18-year retrospective open-cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: As understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment strategies for osteoarthritis (OA) evolves, it is important to understand how patient factors are also changing. Our goal was to examine demographics and known risk factors of patients with OA over time. DESIGN: Open-cohort retrospective study using electronic health records. SETTING: Large US integrated health system with 7 hospitals, 2.6 million outpatient clinic visits and 97 300 hospital admissions annually in a mostly rural geographic region. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with at least two encounters and a diagnosis of OA or OA-relevant surgery between 2001 and 2018. Because of geographic region, over 96% of participants were white/Caucasian. INTERVENTIONS: None. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics were used to examine age, sex, body mass index (BMI), Charlson Comorbidity Index, major comorbidities and OA-relevant prescribing over time. RESULTS: We identified 290 897 patients with OA. Prevalence of OA increased significantly from 6.7% to 33.5% and incidence increased 37% (from 3772 to 5142 new cases per 100 000 patients per year) (p<0.0001). Percentage of females declined from 65.3% to 60.8%, and percentage of patients with OA in the youngest age bracket (18-45 years) increased significantly (6.2% to 22.7%, p<0.0001). The percentage of patients with OA with BMI ≥30 remained above 50% over the time period. Patients had low comorbidity overall, but anxiety, depression and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease showed the largest increases in prevalence. Opioid use (tramadol and non-tramadol) showed peaks followed by declines, while most other medications increased slightly in use or remained steady. CONCLUSIONS: We observe increasing OA prevalence and a greater proportion of younger patients over time. With better understanding of how characteristics of patients with OA are changing over time, we can develop better approaches for managing disease burden in the future.

The Burden of Metastatic Cancer-Induced Bone Pain: A Narrative Review.

Bone pain is one of the most common forms of pain reported by cancer patients with metastatic disease. We conducted a review of oncology literature to further understand the epidemiology of and treatment approaches for metastatic cancer-induced bone pain and the effect of treatment of painful bone metastases on the patient's quality of life. Two-thirds of patients with advanced, metastatic, or terminal cancer worldwide experience pain. Cancer pain due to bone metastases is the most common form of pain in patients with advanced disease and has been shown to significantly reduce patients' quality of life. Treatment options for cancer pain due to bone metastases include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, palliative radiation, bisphosphonates, denosumab, and opioids. Therapies including palliative radiation and opioids have strong evidence supporting their efficacy treating cancer pain due to bone metastases; other therapies, like bisphosphonates and denosumab, do not. There is sufficient evidence that patients who experience pain relief after radiation therapy have improved quality of life; however, a substantial proportion are nonresponders. For those still requiring pain management, even with available analgesics, many patients are undertreated for cancer pain due to bone metastases, indicating an unmet need. The studies in this review were not designed to determine why cancer pain due to bone metastases was undertreated. Studies specifically addressing cancer pain due to bone metastases, rather than general cancer pain, are limited. Additional research is needed to determine patient preferences and physician attitudes regarding choice of analgesic for moderate to severe cancer pain due to bone metastases.

Risk Factors Associated with Falls and Fractures Following Prescription of Opioids Among Privately Insured Patients with Osteoarthritis.

Background: While prior research has shown that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) who are prescribed opioids have higher rates of falls and fractures following drug initiation, there is a limited body of work establishing a comprehensive model of factors that influence the risk of falls or fractures among these patients. Objective: Opioids are associated with negative clinical outcomes, including increased risk of falls and fractures. This study assessed the frequency, treatment characteristics, and risk factors associated with falls or fractures among patients with OA taking opioids. Methods: Optum Healthcare Solutions, Inc data (January 2012-March 2017) were used to identify patients over 18 with at least 2 diagnoses of hip and/or knee OA, and at least 90 days' supply of opioids. Patients with cancer were excluded. Falls or fractures outcomes were assessed in the 36-month follow-up period after the date of the first opioid prescription after first OA diagnosis. Demographic, treatment, and clinical characteristics associated with falls or fractures were assessed using logistic regression. Results: Of 16 663 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 3886 (23%) had at least 1 fall or fracture during follow-up. Of these 3886 patients, 1349 (35%) had at least 1 fall with an average of 3 fall claims, and 3299 (85%) patients had at least 1 fracture with an average of 8 claims during follow-up. Spine (15.8%) and hip (12.5%) fractures were most common. Median time to fall or fracture was 18.6 and 13.9 months, respectively. Significant (P<.05) risk factors associated with at least 1 fall or fracture during the follow-up period included alcohol use (odds ratio [OR], 3.41), history of falling (OR, 2.19), non-tramadol opioid use (OR, 1.31), age (OR, 1.03), benzodiazepine use (OR, 1.21), and at least 1 osteoporosis diagnosis (OR, 2.06). Discussion: This study is among only a few that clearly identifies the substantial impact and frequency of falls and fractures associated with prescribing non-tramadol opioids to patients with OA. Findings suggest that fall or fracture risks need to be considered when managing OA pain with opioids. Conclusion: Falls and fractures impose a major clinical burden on patients prescribed opioids for OA-related pain management. Falls or fracture risks should be an important consideration in the ongoing treatment of patients with OA.

Factors associated with physician-reported treatment status of patients with osteoarthritis pain.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is typically associated with pain, but many patients are not treated. METHODS: This point in time study explored factors associated with treatment status, using logistic regression of data from the Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme conducted in the United States. Patients' treatment status was based on physician-reported, current: 1) prescription medication for OA vs. none; and 2) physician treatment (prescription medication and/or recommendation for specified nonpharmacologic treatment for OA [physical or occupational therapy, acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, or cognitive behavior therapy/psychotherapy]) vs. self-management (no prescription medication or specified nonpharmacologic treatment). RESULTS: The 841 patients (including 57.0% knee OA, 31.9% hip OA) reported mild (45.4%) or moderate or severe (54.6%) average pain intensity over the last week. The majority were prescribed medication and/or recommended specified nonpharmacologic treatment; 218 were not prescription-medicated and 122 were self-managed. Bivariate analyses showed less severe patient-reported pain intensity and physician-rated OA severity, fewer joints affected by OA, lower proportion of joints affected by knee OA, better health status, lower body mass index, and lower ratings for cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks, for those not prescribed medication (vs. prescription-medicated). Multivariate analyses confirmed factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with prescription medication included (odds ratio): physician-rated current moderate OA severity (vs. mild, 2.03), patient-reported moderate OA severity 6 months ago (vs. mild, 1.71), knee OA (vs. not, 1.81), physician-recommended (0.28) and patient-reported (0.43) over-the-counter medication use (vs. not), prior surgery for OA (vs. not, 0.37); uncertain income was also significant. Factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with physician treatment included (odds ratio): physician-recommended nonpharmacologic therapy requiring no/minimal medical supervision (vs. not, 2.21), physician-rated current moderate OA severity (vs. mild, 2.04), patient-reported over-the-counter medication use (vs. not, 0.26); uncertain time since diagnosis was also significant. Patient-reported pain intensity and most demographic factors were not significant in either model. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 in 4 patients were not prescribed medication and 1 in 7 were self-managed, although many were using over-the-counter medications or nonpharmacologic therapies requiring no/minimal medical supervision. Multiple factors were significantly associated with treatment status, including OA severity and over-the-counter medication, but not pain intensity or most demographics.

Pain severity and healthcare resource utilization in patients with osteoarthritis in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) by osteoarthritis (OA) pain severity. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys of US physicians and their patients were conducted between February and May 2017. Using the Numeric Rating Scale, patients were classified by self-reported pain intensity in the last week into mild (0-3), moderate (4-6), and severe (7-10) cohorts. Parameters assessed included clinical characteristics, HCRU, and current caregiver support. Descriptive statistics were obtained, and analysis of variance and chi-square tests were performed. RESULTS: Patients (n = 841) were mostly female (60.9%) and white (77.8%), with mean age of 64.6 years. Patients reported mild (45.4%), moderate (35.9%), and severe (18.7%) OA pain. Mean number of affected joints varied by pain severity (range mild: 2.7 to severe: 3.6; p < 0.0001). Pain severity was associated with an increased number of physician-reported and patient-reported overall healthcare provider visits (HCPs; both p < 0.001). As pain increased, patients reported an increased need for mobility aids, accessibility modifications to homes, and help with daily activities due to functional disability. The number of imaging tests used to diagnose OA was similar across pain severity but varied when used for monitoring (X-rays: p < 0.0001; computerized tomography scans: p < 0.0447). Hospitalization rates for OA were low but were significantly associated with pain severity (mild: 4.9%; severe: 11.5%). Emergency department visits were infrequent but increasing pain severity was associated with more prior and planned surgeries. CONCLUSION: Greater current pain was associated with more prior HCRU including imaging for monitoring progression, HCP visits including more specialty care, hospitalizations, surgery/planned surgery, and loss of independence due to functional disability. Yet rates of hospitalizations and X-ray use were still sizable even among patients with mild pain. These cross-sectional findings warrant longitudinal assessment to further elucidate the impact of pain on HCRU.

Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Patterns Among Patients Diagnosed With Cluster Headache in U.S. Healthcare Claims Data.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns of patients with cluster headache (CH). BACKGROUND: CH is an uncommon trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia with limited evidence-based treatment options. Patients suffer from extremely painful unilateral headache attacks and autonomic symptoms with episodic and chronic cycles. DESIGN/METHODS: This retrospective analysis used insurance claims from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® research databases from 2009 to 2014. Two cohorts were compared: CH patients (with ≥2 CH claims) were propensity score matched with 4 non-headache controls, all with continuous enrollment for 12 months before and after the date of first CH claim or matched period among controls. RESULTS: CH patients (N = 7589) were mainly male (57.4%) and 35-64 years old (73.2%), with significantly more claims for comorbid conditions vs controls (N = 30,341), including depressive disorders (19.8% vs 10.0%), sleep disturbances (19.7% vs 9.1%), anxiety disorders (19.2% vs 8.7%), and tobacco use disorders (12.8% vs 5.3%), with 2.5 times greater odds of suicidal ideation (all P < .0001). Odds of drug dependence were 3-fold greater among CH patients (OR = 2.8 [95% CI 2.3-3.4, P < .0001]). CH patients reported significantly greater use of prescription medications compared with controls; 25% of CH patients had >12 unique prescription drug claims. Most commonly prescribed drug classes for CH patients included: opiate agonists (41%), corticosteroids (34%), 5HT-1 agonists (32%), antidepressants (31%), NSAIDs (29%), anticonvulsants (28%), calcium antagonists (27%), and benzodiazepines (22%). Only 30.4% of CH patients received recognized CH treatments without opioids during the 12-month post-index period. These patients were less likely to visit emergency departments or need hospitalizations (26.8%) as compared to CH patients with no pharmacy claims for recognized CH treatments or opioids (33.6%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of CH is associated with significant co-morbidity, including substance use disorders and suicidal ideation, and treatment patterns indicating low use of recognized CH treatments.

Variations in the management of fibromyalgia by physician specialty: rheumatology versus primary care.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of physician specialty regarding diagnosis and treatment of fibromyalgia (FM) and assess the clinical status of patients initiating new treatment for FM using data from Real-World Examination of Fibromyalgia: Longitudinal Evaluation of Costs and Treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outpatients from 58 sites in the United States were enrolled. Data were collected via in-office surveys and telephone interviews. Pairwise comparisons by specialty were made using chi-square, Fisher's exact tests, and Student's t-tests. RESULTS: Physician specialist cohorts included rheumatologists (n=54), primary care physicians (n=25), and a heterogeneous group of physicians practicing pain or physical medicine, psychiatry, neurology, obstetrics and gynecology, osteopathy, or an unspecified specialty (n=12). The rheumatologists expressed higher confidence diagnosing FM (4.5 on a five-point scale) than primary care physicians (4.1) (P=0.037). All cohorts strongly agreed that recognizing FM is their responsibility. They agreed that psychological aspects of FM are important, but disagreed that symptoms are psychosomatic. All physician cohorts agreed with a multidisciplinary approach including nonpharmacological and pharmacological treatments, although physicians were more confident prescribing medications than alternative therapies. Most patients reported moderate to severe pain, multiple comorbidities, and treatment with several medications and nonpharmacologic therapies. CONCLUSION: Physician practice characteristics, physician attitudes, and FM patient profiles were broadly similar across specialties. The small but significant differences reported by physicians and patients across physician cohorts suggest that despite published guidelines, treatment of FM still contains important variance across specialties.

Long-term evaluation of opioid treatment in fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES: In a 12-month observational study, we evaluated the effect of opioid use on the outcomes in 1700 adult patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Data were evaluated using propensity score matching after patients were divided into cohorts based on their baseline medication use: (1) taking an opioid (concurrent use of tramadol was permitted); (2) taking tramadol (but no opioids); and (3) not taking opioids or tramadol. Changes in outcomes were assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory for severity and pain-related interference (BPI-S, BPI-I), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), Patient Health Questionnaire for depression (PHQ-8), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), and economic factors. Time-to-opioid or tramadol discontinuation was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. RESULTS: Compared with the opioid cohort, the nonopioid cohort demonstrated significantly greater reductions (P<0.05) in BPI-I, FIQ, PHQ-8, SDS, and ISI; the tramadol cohort compared with the opioid group showed greater reductions on FIQ and ISI. Reductions in BPI-S and GAD-7 did not differ significantly among cohorts. Compared with the opioid cohort, patients in the tramadol cohort had fewer outpatient visits to health care providers. Few significant differences were found between the tramadol and nonopioid cohorts across outcomes. DISCUSSION: Although pain severity was reduced over time in all cohorts, opioid users showed less improvement in pain-related interference with daily living, functioning, depression, and insomnia. Overall, the findings show little support for the long-term use of opioid medications in patients with fibromyalgia given the poorer outcomes across multiple assessment domains associated with this cohort.

Longitudinal observation of treatment patterns and outcomes for patients with fibromyalgia: 12-month findings from the reflections study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe 12-month treatment patterns and outcomes for patients starting a new medication for fibromyalgia in routine clinical practice. DESIGN AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Data from 1,700 patients were collected at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Repeated measures and Poisson regression models controlling for demographic, clinical, and baseline outcomes were used to assess changes in health outcomes (Brief Pain Inventory severity and interference, Sheehan Disability Scale, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire), satisfaction, and economic factors for patients who initiated on pregabalin (214, 12.6%), duloxetine (264, 15.5%), milnacipran (134, 7.9%), or tricyclic antidepressants (66, 3.9%). Sensitivity analyses were run using propensity-matched cohorts. RESULTS: Patients started on 145 unique drugs for fibromyalgia, and over 75% of patients took two or more medications concurrently for fibromyalgia at each time point assessed. Overall, patients showed improvement on the four health outcomes, with few differences across medication cohorts. At baseline, patients reported annual averages of 20.3 visits for outpatient care, 27.7 missed days of work, and 32.6 days of care by an unpaid caregiver. The duloxetine and milnacipran (vs pregabalin or tricyclic antidepressant) cohorts had fewer outpatient visits during the 12-month study. Patients reported satisfaction with overall treatment and their fibromyalgia medication (46.0% and 42.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world setting, patients with fibromyalgia reported modest improvements, high resource, and medication use, and were satisfied with the care they received. Cohort differences were difficult to discern because of the high rates of drug discontinuation and concomitant medication use over the 12-month study period.

Burden of illness and treatment patterns for patients with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to describe burden of illness and treatment patterns, and to examine the patient, physician, and care factors associated with the treatment choices of individuals receiving new prescriptions for fibromyalgia (FM). DESIGN: This is a baseline assessment of the Real-World Examination of Fibromyalgia: Longitudinal Evaluation of Costs and Treatments (REFLECTIONS), a prospective observational study. Baseline data (including a physician survey, a patient visit form, and computer-assisted telephone interviews) were collected from July 2008 through May 2010 in 58 care settings in the United States, including Puerto Rico. RESULTS: Patients (N = 1,700) were mostly female (94.6%) and white (82.9%). Mean age was 50.4 years and mean duration of illness was 5.6 years. Mean Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire total score was 54.4 (range 0-80), and Brief Pain Inventory average pain severity level was 5.5 (range 0-10). Patients reported high annual health care use and numerous work limitations related to FM. Patients were taking 182 unique types of medications prescribed for FM, including duloxetine (26.8%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (26.6%), pregabalin (24.5%), opioids (24.2%), tramadol (15.3%), benzodiazepines (15.2%), cyclobenzaprine (12.9%), milnacipran (8.9%), and others. Most patients took more than one medication concurrently (77.8%). Type of current medications used was most strongly associated with medication history and physician specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Burden of illness was high for patients with FM, and treatment patterns were highly variable. Importantly, the treatments with the most evidence to support their use were not always the most frequently chosen.

Incidence and impact of pain conditions and comorbid illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with pain often present with more than one painful condition. The purpose of this study was to characterize the rates of comorbidity, pain medication use, and health care costs for 23 selected pain conditions in a large health plan using administrative claims data from 2005 to 2007. METHODS: Eligible patients included 1,211,483 adults with at least one pain condition during the one-year study period. Pain condition cohorts were classified based on the first diagnosis present in the claims during the study period. RESULTS: Musculoskeletal pain conditions were among the most prevalent cohorts including low back pain, osteoarthritis, and fibromyalgia. Cancer pain was the least prevalent cohort. Conditions with the lowest illness severity included migraine and painful bladder syndrome cohorts, while cohorts with diabetic neuropathy, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated pain, and cancer pain were the most severe. Across cohorts, the mean number of comorbid pain conditions ranged from 1.39 (for cancer pain and migraine) to 2.65 (for multiple sclerosis pain). High rates of mental health conditions were found in cohorts with HIV-associated pain and multiple sclerosis pain (42.59% and 34.78%) and were lowest among cohorts with rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthropathy (12.73% and 13.31%), respectively. Rates of sleep disorders ranged from 5.47% (for painful bladder syndrome) to 11.59% (for multiple sclerosis pain). Overall, patients averaged 3.53 unique pain medications during the study period. Considerable annual total health care costs were observed in the cancer pain cohort and the lowest costs were observed in the postherpetic neuropathy, surgically-induced pain, migraine, and irritable bowel syndrome cohorts. Costs attributed to pain were highest among the multiple sclerosis, HIV, and cancer pain cohorts. The highest pharmaceutical costs were observed in the HIV cohort. CONCLUSION: These findings underscore the heterogeneity of patients with pain in terms of burden of illness, costs to the health care system, and the complexity of commonly co-occurring disorders.

Comparison of health care use and costs in newly diagnosed and established patients with fibromyalgia.

UNLABELLED: In 2004, the American Pain Society (APS) issued evidence-based fibromyalgia treatment recommendations. The objective of this claims database analysis is to describe prescription and medical use in patients with newly diagnosed and established fibromyalgia. Privately insured patients with 2+ myalgia/myositis claims (1999 to 2005) were categorized as newly diagnosed or established; this dichotomy involves comparisons between prediagnosis (S1) and postdiagnosis (S2) stages in the newly diagnosed and between newly diagnosed (S2) and established patients (S3). Use of APS guideline medications increased across stages: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (S1, S2, S3: 20.6%, 22.9%, 25.3%), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) (4.5%, 6.4%, 8.9%), pregabalin/gabapentin (5.4%, 7.4%, 8.8%), benzodiazepines (19.0%, 21.1%, 24.2%), non-benzodiazepine sedatives (9.1%, 11.5%, 13.7%) (all P < .0001), and opioids (39.5%, 43.3%, 43.9%; S1 vs S2, P < .0001; S2 vs S3, P = .2835). Use of multiple therapeutic classes also increased across stages: 3+ classes (7.1%, 9.6%, 11.8%) (all P < .0001). Office visits to providers increased, on average, after diagnosis: primary care (70.9%, 78.3%, 76.3%; all P < .0001), chiropractors (28.8%, 51.1%, 53.3%; all P < .0001), rheumatologists (4.2%, 9.9%, 10.5%; S1 vs S2, P < .0001; S2 vs S3, P = .0595), mental health (6.4%, 7.3%, 8.3%; S1 vs S2, P < .0001, S2 vs S3, P = .0003). Average health care costs rose after diagnosis in the newly diagnosed group (S1: $6555 vs S2: $8654, P < .0001). PERSPECTIVE: This paper investigates prescription drug and medical care use with respect to stages of fibromyalgia diagnosis. Established fibromyalgia patients use more medical resources and have higher rates of concomitant medication use than newly diagnosed fibromyalgia patients. Findings can help educate providers regarding optimal drug treatment patterns in this population.

Parental depression as a moderator of secondary deficits of depression in adult offspring.

This study examined whether having a depressed parent intensifies the secondary deficits that often co-occur with offspring's depression symptoms. The sample was adult offspring of parents who had been diagnosed with depression 23 years earlier (N = 143) and demographically matched nondepressed parents (N = 197). Respondents completed mailed questionnaires. After controlling for demographic factors, offspring who were more depressed experienced more impairment: physical dysfunction, pain, and disability; anxiety, smoking, and drinking-related problems; poorer social resources; negative events and severe stressors; and reliance on emotional discharge coping. Parental status (depressed or not depressed) was not directly related to offspring impairment once offspring depression symptoms were controlled. However, parental status moderated associations between offspring's depression severity and their impairment: relationships between depression and impairments were generally stronger for offspring of depressed parents than for offspring of nondepressed parents. Depressed individuals who are offspring of depressed parents may be at particular risk for the secondary deficits of depression.

Employees with fibromyalgia: medical comorbidity, healthcare costs, and work loss.

OBJECTIVES: To compare 2005 health care resources among matched samples of employees with fibromyalgia (FM), osteoarthritis (OA), and controls. METHODS: Using a claims database of privately insured individuals, FM and OA samples were derived from those with two or more disease-specific claims in 1999 to 2005 (> or =1 in 2002 to 2005). RESULTS: Total costs for employees with FM ($10,199) approached OA costs ($10,861, P = 0.3758) and were significantly higher than controls ($5274, P < 0.0001). Cost components varied across disease-specific samples (direct medical: FM $7286 vs OA $8325, P < 0.0287; pharmacy: FM $1630 vs OA $1341; indirect: FM $2913 vs OA $2537, P < 0.0001). Employees with FM had more claims than OA for psychiatric diagnoses, chronic fatigue, and most pain conditions. Use of multiple prescription drug classes was common in both samples. CONCLUSIONS: FM imposes significant economic burden. Work loss contributes substantially to the impact.

In search of pharmacoeconomic evaluations for fibromyalgia treatments: a review.

Fibromyalgia is characterised by chronic widespread pain of unknown aetiology and affects approximately 2% of the population. It can cause significant patient disability, sizeable economic costs, complex management decisions and controversy for healthcare providers. In lieu of uniformly approved treatments for fibromyalgia, patients may try multiple pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies with questionable efficacy. The literature lacks pharmacoeconomic studies that balance the cost and benefit of interventions. In the absence of this work, cost outcomes are reviewed in this paper. Due to inconclusive results, further study is needed on fibromyalgia treatment cost-effectiveness. These analyses could provide useful information for policy and evidence-based practice guidelines toward optimal disease management. Medical professionals should be a driving force in understanding the clinical and economic challenges of fibromyalgia.

Depression and fibromyalgia: treatment and cost when diagnosed separately or concurrently.

OBJECTIVE: Depression and fibromyalgia (FM) are often coincident. Both syndromes share common symptoms and impose significant economic burdens. This study compared claims for treatment and costs of FM plus depression with those for FM or depression alone. METHODS: Administrative claims data from a national Fortune 100 manufacturer were used to identify 3 mutually exclusive patient cohorts based on claims with a diagnosis for: FM only, depression only, and FM plus depression. A fourth cohort comprised a random sample of 10% of the employer's overall beneficiary population. Cohorts were compared for demographics, comorbid conditions, and healthcare resources utilization. Mean direct (treatment) costs were calculated and indirect (work loss) costs imputed, and these were assessed using Student's t test and Bonferroni adjustments. RESULTS: Mean annual employer payments (direct plus indirect costs) per patient were 5,163 dollars for FM only, 8,073 dollars for depression only, 11,899 dollars for FM plus depression, and 2,486 dollars for the overall sample. Mean incremental employer payments (i.e., above those for the random sample) per patient with FM plus depression were 9,413 dollars, an amount more than the sum of incremental costs for those with FM or depression alone (8,264 dollars). These costs are consistent with costs of other chronic diseases. CONCLUSION: Patients with FM plus depression are high users of healthcare services. As in studies that established relationships between depression and other medical conditions, incremental costs for patients with FM plus depression were more than additive of costs for each condition alone.

Economic cost and epidemiological characteristics of patients with fibromyalgia claims.

OBJECTIVE: Fibromyalgia (FM) is characterized by widespread pain that can lead to significant patient disability, complex management decisions for physicians, and economic burden on society. We investigated the total costs of FM in an employer population. METHODS: Administrative claims data of a Fortune 100 manufacturer were used to quantify direct (i.e., medical and pharmaceutical claims) and indirect (i.e., disability claims and imputed absenteeism) costs associated with FM. A total of 4699 patients with at least one FM claim between 1996 and 1998 were contrasted with a 10% random sample of the overall beneficiary population. Employee-only subsets of both samples also were drawn. RESULTS: Medical utilization, receipt of prescription drugs, and annual total costs were proportionately similar yet significantly greater among FM claimants than the overall sample (all p < 0.0001). Total annual costs for FM claimants were $5945 versus $2486 for the typical beneficiary (p < 0.0001). Six percent of these costs were attributable to FM-specific claims. The prevalence of disability was twice as high among FM employees than overall employees (p < 0.0001). For every dollar spent on FM-specific claims, the employer spent another $57 to $143 on additional direct and indirect costs. CONCLUSION: Hidden costs of disability and comorbidities greatly increase the true burden of FM. Regardless of the clinical understanding of FM, when a claim for FM is present, considerable costs are involved. Findings suggest that within the management of FM there may be large cost-offset opportunities for reductions in patient, physician, and employer burdens.

The economic burden of depression with painful symptoms.

The economic burden of depression is substantial. The condition is highly prevalent, with both psychiatric and physical symptoms that often inflict pain. The chronic and often debilitating nature of depression results in costly medical therapies, as well as impaired workplace productivity. As a result, the overall economic burden of depression is comparable to that of serious physical illnesses, such as cancer and heart disease. This article presents an overview of the economic burden of depression and provides background on the relationship between depression and pain in this context. Research findings are also presented on the economic burden associated with a particular manifestation of pain among depressed patients, fibromyalgia. When painful physical symptoms accompany the already debilitating psychiatric and behavioral symptoms of depression, the economic burden that ensues for patients and their employers increases considerably. On purely economic grounds, more aggressive outreach may be warranted for patients with depression and comorbid pain to initiate treatment before symptoms are allowed to persist. However, more research is needed to assess the comprehensive economic impact that depression with painful physical symptoms can have on society.